[lifeformed]

It takes away from real human artists who do their part to slowly advance human culture. Music will not develop without human artists. Maybe for this moment in time AI can fulfill some people's musical desires, but it's not going to keep up with the times. The point of art, in a general sense, is humanity. Automating away your artistic needs is like automating away your social needs. It's a one way "relationship" that is superficial and self-indulgent. It's a step towards an empty world.

[pixel_popping]

Why would music not develop without human artists? This isn't true at all, "AI" isn't necessary LLM as well, there is plenty of ways for AI to innovate, and let's be real, most musics from humans are a bit of copy-cat nowadays, ton of AI music actually made me vibe personally and stuff I haven't heard before.

Have you tried a day of listening solely to AI music? I feel you might change your mind, sure sometimes there is some serious off-tune (feels like an hallucination from the model) but we know this is temporary.

PS: I'm conscious of what it does to humanity, but there is also facts that AI does produce great songs, that's 2 different discussions.

[neonstatic]

That's the creator's perspective. From a listener's perspective, it's "do I enjoy it" or "do I not enjoy it". Everything else is intellectualization.

[card_zero]

But that means nothing. There's no raw "enjoy", except maybe drugs, and I have my doubts about that.

[neonstatic]

> There's no raw "enjoy"

What do you mean?

[Ferret7446]

Painters said the same thing about cameras

[Zopieux]

And turns out there is still room to enjoy both photography and paintings as their own art forms.